Evening Star Newspaper, October 31, 1896, Page 19

THE EVENING STAR, SATURDAY, OOTOBER 81, 1896-TWENTY-EIGHT PAGES. Bl Ld | | Digg Wan pg! HH ape Ht ang, eognuDOg SD00Hg0 [fete if OOOOH gUODDOUE FIFTY MILLIONS OF 0 SILVER BAGS AND BOXES. ROBBING THE MINTS Bs Director Preston Chats About Some Big Thieves. FORTUNE IN GOLD DUST AND NUGGETS es Trusted Employes Who Did Not | Resist Temptation. —__._————— CURIOUS —————— SOME STORIES VISITED THE mint at Philadeiphia last week. It now contains more $200,000,000, a has 50,000,000 dard silver dollars a single vault. The San Francisco mint has, I am told, more than $50,000,000 worth of pre metal stored away, and in the vaults the mint at Orleans there ace now something like § 600,000 worth of gold and silver. During y in our Philadelphia treasure house hown the different methods by which Uncle Sam guards his hoard. Every atom of gold and sfiver is watched, and, although the mint hes hendled more than a billion and a half doliars worth of bul- lion since it was founied, only a small part has been lost. Still the temptation to theft is grtdt, ana é¢er} now and then the Treasury Depertment finds a shortage in some of the minte’cr inthe government as- say offices in different parts of the west. The true details of such thefts seldom get intc the newspapers. They are filed away in the records of the Treasury Department and in the minds of the detectives and off- cials wh» have alded in exposing the crimes. During the past week I have heard the stories of a number of such ous erecanthae in con- n with R. E. the mint. Mr. Pre: i the mints in the Uni Re fs th Sam's trea: r, knows more about the mint, perhaps, an ther man ed with the govern- has n in the employ of the tes treasury for the past fo d he is today one of its most ef- You remember how, about 'y Coehr: the phia mi tole | value of $113,000 from the gold it ealng bar from a stack su- ng away of that bul- or of the mi theft was al in che rty-ihre on and, curious! h ted by Coch: who was an under clerk of the robber, and who | yosing his superior got the pl: j d for fort clerk, which he he own . During the inve ion at Philadelphia the thief, Cochran, Preston the story, and Mr. Presion repeated it to me today. Stole a rtane in Gold Dust. “It was away back in 1833," said the di- r of the mint, “when g vast amount of gold was coming in from California that the first big robbery occurred. The culprit ry occurre was James E. Negus, and he was the h clerk of the mi ‘There was at th's ay office at New York, and all of ets were sent by the citie to Philade!phia bullion. egus had the and he for a long tematic stealing from carried on a the different deposits It was his : charge of them, wei m into the vault until they could be melted. By taking a nugget 0 a pinch of dust from each deposit, he w able to steal thousands of dollars, and he probably carried en his stealings during ihe whole of the four years that he was in the joy of the mint. Cochran was at this | a boy working in the mint. F s Negus’ assistant. He was led te that Negus was teking out gold du substituting black sand for it in some of the deposits. He took occasion to reweigh several deposits when S Was not pres- ent, and found that they were from five to ten ounces short. He went to the superin- tendent of the mint and charged Negus with the theft. Negus was called up. He confessed, and stated that he had stolen $10,600 worth of gold dust. As you may see from the letters here in the records of the department, the treasury officials believed his confession, but they did not think he should be arrested, as he had made restit tion. He was allowéd to go free. Within a few weeks he salled for Europe, and that was the last that was ever heard of him. There was no cable in those days, and the probability is that he carried a goodly amount of gold away with him. The rob- tery was not from the treasury, but from the banks who sent in the gold, and there was no way of telling just how much he stole. Cochran, the Mint Robber. “It was in this way that Henry S. Coch- ran became weigh clerk of the mint,” Di- rector Preston went cn. “He took che Place of a thief, and there ts no telling how soon he became a thief himself. He ol | has its number, and it | ‘Well, if any of that gold | you know | eo me that he did not steal anything from the mint until after the deposit of that $16,000,- (00 in gold bars; but his connection with the mint lasted for more than forty years and his position was the same as that of Negus. During his whole term of empioy- ment he had the confidence of every one. i have a letter here, signed by Daniel Stur- geon, who was treasurer of the United States when he was appointed. It is he who advises the appointment, and he de- scribes Henry §. Cochran as honest, able and courteous. Cochran seemed to be crazy for geld. -He fell in love with the precious metal, and when we found that he had robbed the mint of $113,000 he hated to give up his stealings and he complained bitterly when the money found in his house was tak- en away. When he was appointed weigh clerk he was about twenty-three years old. When his robbery was discovered he was sixty-three. He was then a deacon in the Presbyterian Church, and was organizing a campaign for the Salvation Army in the nborhood in which he lived. He had been married and divorced. He had a srown-up daughter. He appeared to be eminentiy respectable in every way and still he had been stealing for years.” Twenty-Five Tons of Gold. “How did you come to suspect him of the robbery?” I asked. was through his own actions,” re- plied the director of the mint. “He had, you know, the charge of the vaults which contained the gold bullion. Much of this lion had been untouched for years. In Vault from which the robbery was de there were $16,000,000 worth of gold s. This vault had not been opened for six years. The gold had been brought from the assay office in New York in 1881 and stored away in 1887. I aided in put- ting it in. The gold bars were piled up rosswise like railroad ties, and they were arranged, as usual, in-a series of melts. When we put the gold in the vaults, we put each melt by itself. Hach gold brick _it is marked as to the melt to which it’ belongs, so we can’ tell just exactly how many picces of gold there are in a vault, just where each plece is, and just what it we'ghs. This bullion was weighed twice before it was put in. There were about twenty-five tons of it. I super- intended the weighing. “I helped to seal the doors of the vault when. we were through, and saw that everything was secured. From time to time the vault was inspected, but the seals were intact, and no one had any idea but that the gold was all there. About two years ago retary Carlisle gave orders that this bullion be coined. The vault was opened, and more than 400 pounds of gold were missing. We had Jittle trouble in detect- ing the thief. Cochran had been much ex- cited when I told him of the intention to coin the bullion. “He objected, and sald the gold was so nicely piled up, and was such a beautiful sight to show to visitors, that the govern- ment had better bring some of its bullion from New York and coin it. I laughed at t nd Cochran then insinuated that the gold might not be ali there. When he found that we really intended to coin the gold, he came over to Washington to see me, thinking there might be yet a chance to stop it. He called at my house here at 11 o'clock one night, and asked if it was really true that the government was going to take the gold out of that vault. I re- plied, ‘Yes.’ He then said: ‘Well, you won't find all the gold there. Some of It is missing. It was never rightly weighed, and it is not there.” It was at this time that I began to suspect him, and I said to myself, is lost, I think here it is. A day or so after e opened the vault, and we found the i was just $113,000 short. Still, the seals were intact. The steel walls of the vault were unbroken, and there was no sign as to where the gold had gone. Cochran seemed very nervous, and upon finding that he was suspected, he confessed that he was the thief. He showed how he had fished the gold out with a crooked wire. He would pull it down from the pile and drag it to the door of the vault, and then Ly slightly pushing the door at the bottom he was able to get it out through the crack between the door and the floor. He had carried It off, bar by bar, in his lunch bas- ket, or in his trou pocket, and had taken it to his home in the suburbs of Philadelphia.” He Sold the Gold to the Mint. “What did he do with the gold?” I asked. “He sold it right back to the mint from which he had stolen it,” replied Mr. Pres- ton. “He did not dare to do this without remelting it, as the gold was so fine that it would be sure to create suspicion. He had at his home a crucible and he remelted the gold, mixing it with silver and lead. This product he sent to us through the s company, and was able to do so without sus n. We found one bar of gold in Cochran’s house the day he con- and we also found $5,000 in gold it was a curicus house. It was meycombed with secret closets, and th: it in these that the money was found. pchran kepi up his ste day the weighing was completed Cochran came down early. He was there before any of the other employes of the mint. ling to the last. The We had weighed part of the gold. The ult was open, and there was a truck in it loaded with bars of bullion. Cochran, finding no one about, picked up twenty of these ba and, one at a time, threw them into the ventilator shaft of the vault, so that they fell in between the roof of the vault and the floor above. When he confessed he told where this gold was, and we got it buck. The remainder was’ par- tially covered by that which we found at the house, and we received something from Cochran's property and his bondsmen. Un- cle Sam is, however, still $12,000 or $12,000 short from that robbery, and the superin- tendent of the mint, Colonel Bosbyshell, may have to pay thi “What did they do with Cochran?” I asked. “He was tried and sent to the peniten- tiary for a term of six years and seven menths. He is now in prison. He weigh- ed 250 pounds when he was arrested. He dces not weigh 150 now, and has lost 100 pounds since his theft was discovered.” “Do you think he was insane?” “That is a question,” replied the director of the mint. “He seemed to be a mono- maniac on the subject of gold. He claimed that he had saved the United States mil- licns of dollars by guarding its treasures, and he was indignant when the gold was taken from him. — Since that time we have not kept gold bullion in vaults of this na- ture, and there will probably never be a robbery of that kind again.” A Lons of $150,000. “Has Uncle Sam ever lost as much as this in the past?” “There was little loss in Cochran’s case,” replied Director Preston. ‘The money was nearly all recovered. There have, however, been big losses in the past. In 1855, just about the time that I entered the Treasury Department, Uncle Sam lost $150,000 at the San Francisco mint. When one of the set- tlements was made it was found that this much was short. Phe melter and refiner claimed that this was waste, that it had been lost in refining or had escaped up the flues. It is a question in my mind whether he did not tell the truth, At any rate, he was arrested, but not convicted. Shortly after his trial he left the United States and vent to South America. He was drowned there. “Another curious case in connection with the San Francisco mint,” Mr. Preston ote on, “occurred just about the close of war, or about 1865. The cashier of the mint, whose name was William Satie was the brother-in-law of the treasurer 0! the United States. During one 0; ton the coiner of the mint claimed to hay livered $120,000 in gold double Rin the cashier. The cashier credited bool with $100,000, and swore that this was the coiner had given him. The result was that there was $20,000 missing. About this same time it was discovered that Macey, the cashier, had embezzled $10,000 of the mint funds set aside for wages, He ac- knowledged the stealing of this, but not the other. He happened to have many in- fluential friends, and in some way or other he escaped prosecution. He was discharged from the mint und came east. On his way through Omaha. he deposited $1,500 in one of the banks there. He put it in under an agsumed name, ard was given a certificate of deposit. He lost this certificate, and the bank refused to retugn the money. He never got it. $20,000 in Spoonfuls. “There was a queer robbery at San Fran- cisco in 1878, by which a colored night watchman stole $20,000 in gold. It was known that gold was in some way or other being taken out of the mint, but {t eould not be traced. The detectives ffhally dis- covered that Henry Smith, the negro might watchman, had been selling bullion. They arrested him and charged him with taking it from the mint. He denied the crime. They then went to his house and thorough- ly Investigated it. They took up the floors and broke the furniture, but could find nothing. They next attacked the yard. They dug the soil over with spades, and found a little furnace in which gold had evidently at some time been melted. This was shown to the watchman, but he said he knew nothing about it. They then went back and dug up a flower bed, which they had not touched on account of its beauty. It was filled with pansies, and the ground about it was covered with rose bushes and geraniums. They had dug about two feet down into this bed when they found a big earthen pot which was covered at the top with melted wax. Breaking this, they dis- covered a saucer beneath it, and under this there were seven cones of yellow zold, worth, all told, about $6,000. They took this to Smith, and he at once confessed. He had stolen about $20,000 in less than three years. He had taken the gold from the separating tanks by means of a spoon. The bullion was placed in such tanks and Weighing Gold Strips.- treated with acid and water to remove the silver. By the action of the acid, the gold fell to the bottom in the shape of a fine black precipitate, and the silver solution was washed away. The tanks were cov- ered and locked at night, but there was a hole in the bottom of them in which a hose was inserted for the washing of the precip- itate. Tne watchman unscrewed the‘hede, and then, by means of a spoon, ladled out a few spoonfuls a day and took them home. Each spconful was worth about $20, and he laid tne precipitate aside until he could buy a furnace and crucibles. With these he turned the black powder into yellow gold by melting it, and he sold the product to the bullion dealers of San Francisco.” How Mint Robbers Escape Panish- ment. “What was done with this man?” I asked. “He was arrested, tried and sent to pris- on,” replied Mr. Preston; “‘but his fate was rather an exception to that of the mint rob- bers of the past. Many of them have es- caped punishment. I do not believe in this at all. I think they should be prosecuted and punished to the full extent of the law, d I thnk the sentence of Cochran was : Take the case of Negus. He con- ed to the stealng of $10,600 and al- owed to go free. Macey, the cashier of whom I spoke as stealing $20,000, was not brosecuted. The melter and refiner who was $150,000 short was not convicted, and there have been several other cases of like na- ture. In 1865 there was a change in the mint at San Francisco. The coiner and melter and refiner delivered all the bullion to the superintendent, and the wastage was declare. It was a month, however, before a new melter and refiner was appointed. In the meantime there was no work done and when the new coiner came to be ap- pointed the bullion was found to be $10,000 short. No suit was ever brought for this crime, and Uncle Sam lost the money. “Another steal at San Francisco, the per- petrators of whch escaped punishment, oc- curred in the sixtie: The assay clerk had a confederate outside, and he raised the mint figures on all the bullion brought by this confederate for sale. If the gold was put at ¥. fine he would raise it to 9.96 or 9.97. would then go to the melter and refiner, and under ordinary circumstances it would have passed all right and the dif- ference would have been credited to waste. “The melter and refiner in this case, how- ever, was an old assayer, and he saw that he was losing gold. The result was that he reassayed some of the gold and discovered the fraud. It was then found that the assay clerk had changed the re- ports of the assayer enough to have made $10,000 by doing so. This man’s name was James H. Ci! He was tried, but the jury disagreed and Uncle Sam rever got a penny back. “It was the same in the burning of the mint at New Orleans a few years ago. A fire broke out in the cashier’s vault be- tween Saturday night ard Monday morn- ing, and when it was discovered $24,000 worth of Uncle Sam's currency was not to be fourd. ‘The cashier was the only man who had the keys of the vault. He shut it up Saturday night and he opened it Monday morning. The vault was lighted by elec ty, and there was no possible hcrest way of the fire being kindled. Jas. M. Dowling, the cashier, was arrested on the suspicion -* robbery and of having embezzled the fund and then kindled the fire to cover his crime. He was smart enough to employ a nephew of the judge who tried the case to defend him, and he was acquitted.” FRANK G. CARPENTER. a Anvious to Please. From the Boston Transcript. Man at the table—‘Waiter, these eggs are hard as a brick. You must have boiled them more than three minutes.” Waiter—“Yes, sir; the boss has told us al- ways to do more than is asked of us, and in that way the trade will be built up. You only asked to have your eggs boiled three minutes, but to show our willingness to accommodate and to make things agree- able, we boiled them six minutes.”” ————_-e-_____ An Aggravated Case. From the Detroit Free Press. “Why under the sun does Whimperly want a divorce? His wife had a great deal of money when he married her.” “And she has it yet. That's the whole trouble.” ————o-—______ rT SUSTEEN'T0 ONE, FREE AND UNLIMITED Gold, Silver gnd Wheat--| a7 The Parmer and the Coinage Question---" Mr.’ Dodge's Figures. ‘To the Editor of The Evening Star: Commenting on the advantages enjoyed by the farmers of the present day, the Prairie Farmer of August 16, 1890, says: “When our fathers were boys, say twenty- five or thirty years’ ago,.a man could raise and harvest ten acres of corn; in this latter part of the nineteenth century he Can raise fifty to seventy-five acres: In those good old days, the haying took a barrel of whisky and a half dozen good strofig men ft secure; now, with the mower, the horse rake, the loader, the stacker and hay carrier, three men will do a large hay crop. “We see at once the advantages the farmer of today possesses over those who tilled the soil only thirty years ago. ~ “Now you very plainly see that the one man can now accomplish at least six times as much as our fathers did. “We may attribute this wholly to the ald of machinery in our work—we see plainly what science is doing for us; we see what has been discovered. We see at once our marvelous capability of production over our fathers.” And see the following from the Prairie Farmer of 1891: A Relic of the “Good Old Times.” “Farmers cannot realize how unsalable and unremunerative were the products of the farms of their forefathers, or how dear and difficult to obtain were the products of manufacture. What is now a necessity to comfortable existence was then unknown, cr practically unattainable by men of moi- erate means. Their families were fed from the growth of the fields, and clothed with the product of domestic looms. Little was purchased from beyond the boundary of the farm, both because there was little to buy and still less to buy with. There was no surplus, as a rule, that could fill the family treasury, offer inducement to extravagance, or lay up stores for a ‘rainy day’ or de- clining years. Life had 1ts compensations; industry was a necessity, wants were few, rural tastes simple and natural, and con- suming ambition less“controlling than at present. Ina Hill town,ef gne,.of the east- ern states, almost exclusively agricultural still, in a country sforeris«asdaybook of a former proprietor, bearing date 1817, in which thése items’; *cWarges to customers, according to the United States statistician’s report: 1 Ib. coffee... 49% 25 1% yds. calico. 1 % Ib. loaf sugar. Sy, ¢ ZS yd. muslin. 42 44 Wb, ten....... de GH, ydu. fulled cloth 7 92 Wb. ponder... Ze 171 gilt X. B,ram, 1 5 “E UMS sast black sii 18 exer. Iga. $dsg calico % doz. plates.....2 | 29°D yds. cambric B Ibs.cot. yarn,No.9. 2 25 4 ya. shirting..... nines ~1Bek Fab W. 1. rum, gl’ spelling books. 3. 50 1 yd. flannel. . {G2 Ibe. veal. 6 12 pearl buttons. 4. MB cz. inatgo = 3 % yd. cambric. . b. Hy: 1 skein ilk. he An item the rate of w: community gf 1 work, 25 cegts.? In the same region the cheapest fg#m lébor is now $1 per’day, and $1.75 in harvest. With farm labor at 50 cents, one day’s work would purchase a yard of calico. Now an hour's work in haying or harvest 4ime.would buy at least two yards of calico. If a farmer needed a garden hoe, he could possibly buy one (with veal at 3 cents per, pound at retail) for thirty-three pounds of veal, unless the dealer should demend a wholesale rate for purchase of meats instead of barter that promised him no profit,.Now. a smaller quantity of veal would suffice to purchase a half dozen hoes. ‘The cost, of farm, imple- ments, manufactures in iron or steel, crockery and nearly all. manufactures is cheapened in similar proportion, enlarging the possibilities of comfortable and luxuri- ous living to an extent that few of the present generation can appreciate.” In nothing has the farmer been more benefited than in the reduction of the cost of iron and steel. bs for transient labor in a In 1872 steel rails cost, per ton. $112.90 In 1891. - 42.50 In_ 1803-4 21.00 By this means the railroad. companies were not only enabled to greatly extend their lines all over the west, but also to use heavier rails and cars, and thereby reduce the rates of freight immensely. As stated in the agricultural report of March, 1891, the, average all-rail freight on wheat from Chicago to New York had been fe- duced from 30 cents in 1870 to 15 cents in 1889—one-half. That, of course, added fif- teen cents to the price of every bushel of wheat sold by the farmers of the west. The freight has been reduced still more since then, and yet there ure people who-| grumble at the rate, although two-thirds of the railroads are in the hands of receiv- ers, and in 184, according to the report of the interstate commerce commission, their total earnings were $29,000,000 less than their expenses! Before the advent of railroads the west- ern farmers, on the average, realized only about half as much for their wheat as dil those of New York and the east. In fact, there was comparatively no market for it, except for use at home. My brother-in- law, living in central Wisconsin, sent a lcad from Waupun to Milwaukee through the woods, by a wagon and four horses, and the amount re ‘fort but little more than paid.the expenses of the man and team! me ~ gate A farmer, writing to the Prairie Farmer, says that when he first’ began~ raising wheat in Iilinois, he spent nearly a week hauling {t°to’-Chicago through the sloughs and mud with an ox team, sold it for forty cents a bushel, and took his pay in brown sugar at fifteen cents a pound, and cotton cloth at thirty cents a yard! ~ =. And so right here in Virginia, when a free silverite was complaining this~sum- mer that he could only. get. fifty-seven cents for his wheat, his old mother said to him: “John, when you, were a boy, your father hauled his whéat all the way to Alexandria, and/got-—only.fifty. cents a buskel, and then _pald thirty-seven and a aes cents a yard forpcalico for a dress or me.” * : I could fill The Star with similar illustra- tions, but what's the use? They are simply what every inteig person must admit if he will only stop # think. A great ado has been made about farm mortgages, and yet fhe record shqws that the proportion Is nffich less among the farmers than any other class of property holders. As the’ Kansas City Times of a year ago well ii ‘As long as sixty-six out of every tdtmers in the Unit States own thelr fatms, more than hall of them without a. ever, it will not be né sympathy over 'the ‘Adwntrodden tillers of the soll.” Comptited } this the eitics show a renting populiition"6f seventy-seven out of 100, while tha mottgages of those who own cover almust their number. The farmer appears'to daing quite well, all things considerég.” And this is fully con- firmed by the n Agriculturist of the present week, as already published in The Star. Pee bae Another point!'that"s overlooked also is the fmproved GYndition of the Hfe of the farmer and his famfty. A writer for one of our agricultural papers,‘in speaking of farm life at the present time, says: “And another cat @ cause more poten- ttal than all others, for increasing content- ment on the farm is found in the improved cenditions indoors and out of doors. Ma- crinarsy does most A oe ae bah iG There ie for reading and for musi there are books and musical instruments. farmers and their wives hare in the advantages that have resulted from advancement in practical science.” aay eee has well rate ji i: e last fifty years the improvement in the home life of the American farmers and thelr families has been:the most pro- nounced feature of our sogjal progress, Invention has done away with most ofthe dreary drudgery of the house and the hard- est labor in the fields. “The development of manufactures and railroads has added bil- Hons to farm values “and furnished “‘tnnu- merable accessories of comfort and luxury a incumbrance what- eesary to Waste any Piano has superseded the machine has given time for mental ‘cultivation. To the Bible and almanac that constituted the average farm house Mbrary of the old da: newspapers, Magazines and well-selected volumes of history, biography, poetry and romance have been added. Carpets are on the floors that used to be bare. Works of art adorn the once naked walls. A dollar will go farther today in buying lterature than five dollars went fifty years ago. As to art, the change is even more wonderful. Millions of farmers are living in a style that would only haye been possible to the wealthiest citizens !n their grandfathers’ time.” This is equally true of our mechanics and laborers, to whom the advocates of free silver also appeal. While, of course, they suffer in common with ail others, and to even & greater degree, by the stagnation of business, yet there is not one of them Whose condition is not infinitely better than that of those who preceded them. There is not a farmer or a laborer who does not have in his home today things which are considered necessities, and which his fa- ther could not have, even as luxuries. The great mass of these things did not formerly exist—they were not made, and many of those which were made he could not afford to buy. While every article they use or consume has been greatly reduced in cost, as shown by the census reports, their wages have been increased nearly 50 per cent since 1850, or, if measured by the purchasing power of the dollar, nearly 70 per cent. As Mulhall says, no nation in the world has prospered as has the United States in the last decade, and in none is labor so well paid and housed. He further says in no other nation is there so large a proportion of the people educated as in the United States. In no other country are the farmers and laborers as intelligent as in the United States; and though they may at first be misled by the false statements of demagogues, especially when suffering from hard times, in the end their “sober second thought” will set them right on the questions of the day, as I have no doubt the result will show. A Reply to Mr. Dodge. To the Editor of The Evening Star: Permit me to say a few words in regard to the very interesting letter of W. C. Dodge on “The Farmers and Free Silver” as it appeared in yesterday’s Star. Mr. Dodge is right, and his statements that the cost of production of grain has cheapened is not disputed at all. But this is of sec- ordary importance. The important point for consideration is the relation of cost of production and market price of the product. If a farmer receives $1 per bushel which cost him $1.25 to raise he runs behind, and if he receives 50 cents per bushel which cost him 40 cents he is prosperous. The question simply is: Does our farmer receive back the cost of production when he sells his wheat, corn, &c.? Permit me to call attention to the report of the statistician of the Department of Agriculture published March, 1894. On page 106 of that report the “Expense of raising wheat and corn” in the United States is stated as follows: Cost per acre of raising wheat....$11.69. Cost per acre of raising corn $11.71. ‘The report continues: “In the statistician’s report for December, 1893, the average farm value of wheat and corn produced per acre was stated as fol- lows: Wheat, $6.16; corn, $8.21. This would show on the face cf it a virtual loss to the farmer of $5.53 per acre of wheat and $3.50 per acre of corn for the year 1893. orga i d that suggests [ farmers, vm&., “one-half day’s *| 8. “The results have been derived from indi- vidual estimates made by over 25,000 prac- tical farmers in the case of wheat and over 28,000 in the case of corn. A second set of replies waz received from over 4,000 ex- perts, Le. the graduates of various agri- cultural colleges, now engaged in farming, and this result tallies very closely wit! that obtained from the general inquiry.” Our farmers are generally intelligent; these correspondents were mer picked in every community for their intelligence and candor, and there is no reason for question- ing the correctness of these estimates; in fact, abundance of other proof can be fur- nished to corroborate them. The average yield of wheat in the United States is about twelve bushels per acre; that of corn about twenty-five bushels. It follows that our farmers must receive on an average nearly $1 per bushel for wheat or nearly 50 cenis for corn, or else suffer loss. A glance at the market reports shows that for many years the prices of grain have been below—at many times 50 per cent below—the cost of production, and still people wonder why our farmers are poverty stricken, discontented ard restive. These statistics certainly tell the story plainly enough. No doubt the cost of production of wheat, corn, &c., has been lowered by improved machinery, &c.; no doubt the rapid increase in the area for cultivation of cereals throughout the world has forced prices down somewhat; but we must be very blind if we cafinot see that the con- traction of the world’s currency, by which the world’s products are measured, is the chief cause which has forced wheat, corn and almost all other commodities far be- low the cost of production. Let us have the whole truth; half truths are dangerous, H. F. SUKSDORF. Only One Standard. ‘To the Fditor of The Evening Star: I have followed with much interest the symposium you have been conducting on the money question, and, after all, I find nothing, in my judgment, in the whole de- bate more iftstructive than the following brief quotation from “The Political Econ- omy of Natural Law,” from the pen of Henry Wood, published in 1894. In a nut- shell, his chapter on the money question is as follows: “Assuming that gold and silver compose the normal and universally accepted coin currency, what is the teaching of natural law concerning them? That there cannot be two standards any more than two yard- sticks. Bimetallism means two metals, and not two standards. One or the other must be the standard. The standard should be of the metal which changes least (in value) as a result of the increase of the amount of it That is gold. The ratio of value be- tween gold and silver bullion has vibrated somewhat during the whole historic period, but never before has the divergence been so wide as at the present time (1894). Any change which would make silver the stand- ard would cause a loss proportionate to the width of this divergence, and ultimately the loss would have to be borne by labor.” Doesn't that cover the ground? H.L.W. Relative Value of Gold and Silver. ‘To the Editor of The Evening Ster: It pleased the Great Creator to make the pure metals, the non-oxidizable metals of gold and silver, very scarce on this our swiftly-moving planet, and hence their use for the money of the world. For centuries the relative value of these two precious metals has been determined by the quan- tity of each metal in the world at any given time. When for every ounce of gold in the world there were ten ounces of sil- ver, that ratio of quantity established the ratio of value of the two metals. A little over sixty years ago an American Con- gress ascertained that at that time for every ounce of gold in the world there were sixteen ounces of silver, and upon that proportionate supply of the two metals that Congress enacted that an American silver dollar must be a 16 to 1 dollar, or that an American silver dollar must have the weight of sixteen gold dol- lars, A few years after the discovery of gold in California the proportionate supply of gold and silver in the world was changed. For several years prior to the commence+ ment of our civil war there were not more than fifteen ounces of silver for every ounce of gold in the world, and consequent- ly, during most of the time between 1850 and 1860, silver dollars commanded a pre- mium over gold in all the great commer- cial cities of the world. Now what is the relative supply of gold and silver in the world? It is the opinion of those best qualified-to form an opinion on the subject that for every ounce of gold in the world there are at the present time more than thirty-two ounces of silver. And, conse- quently, that fact has established the pres- ent relative value of gold and silver, and not the demonetization of silver by all the great commercial nations. The advocates of the free and unlimited Rois Wd eS dollars have the cart before the horse. It was enormous of silver when com- with that of gold that led to the tion of silver. Ji by the metals, or by the law of supply and demand, a 16 | te 1 silver dollar contains but fifty cents’ worth of silver, and no act of Congress can increase that value. No legislative enact- ment ever has or ever will change the | value of these precious metals. Hence, should any future Congress authorize the free coinage of 16 to 1 silver dollars, those ollars would possess only half the pur- chasing power of gold dollars. Every mer- chant would have a gold price and a silver price for every article he had to sell, and the silver price would be double that of the gold price. So also in the valuation of all other property there would be a gold price and a silver price. The only per- sons who- would be benefited by the free | coinage of 16 to 1 silver dollars would be dishonest debtors, who would be enabled to pay their debts in those dishonest and lying dollars, And, therefore, the conti- | dent prediction by the peripatetic, illogical | and windy champion of the free coinage of fifty-cent silver dollars, that the authori- zation of the coinage of such dollars by our government would at once give to those dollars the value and purchasing Power of gold dollars, is more than absurd —it is absolutely idiotic. ZENAS C. ROBBINS. WHICH IS RIGHT? OR IS EITHER? An Interesting Election Pazzle—The Chicago Record Poll Analyzed. To the Editor of The Evening Star: Conceding its defects and limitations, yet “the poll of the middle west” by the Chi- cago Record furnishes the best data we have for prognosticating the outcome of the coming election. That poll is of small importance as to the numer of votes cast for the respective candidates, except in Chicago, where the number polled is so large that a reason- able guess of the result in that city may be entertained. The Record tables simply show that so many persons have voted, but give no insight into the probable action of the vast majority who have not re- sponded to its‘call. Emanating from a re- Publican source, of course, more republi- cans than democrats have voted; and as residents of cities are more ready with their pens and brains, and always have writing and postal facilities convenient, I judge that most of the-votes cast are from citie: where it is not doubted that sound money ideas prevail. What does the Record poll show? Let me present the two usual ways of inter- preting it. In so doi I will speak of the democratic and populist vote of 1892 as “democrats.” Take Minnesota for an illustration. I give the figures of 1892: Harrison . Cleveland . Weaver The last published poll stands: Bryan . McKinley - Palmer . Total ....... Change in party vote since 1892 Republicans for Bryan Democrats for McKinley. = The combined opposition vote in 1892 was 120,233, a, republican minority of 7,410. As per Record, McKinley by change of votes €ains 13 over Bryan. If in a poll of 6,350 votes he gains by exchange 130 in the total vote of the state (67,238), he will gain 5,471. --On the Record basis, Palmer's vote will be 3,619. From that we conclude that the vote next week will stand thus: 1892: Democratic, 130,243, less Palmer's vote (3,619), democratic, 126,614; republican, 12,823, plus McKinley’s gain by exchange BAW, making 128,204, or a republican ma- jority of 1, 5 " ze The total vote of 1894 was 20,117 in ex- cess of 1802 It ig safe to put the total vote of 1896 as 35,000 greater than four years ago. If that excess be equally di- vided, the above republican majority will not be disturbed. Now. Jet us approach the result in Min- nesota from another view of the Record’s poll. How did the two parties, as recorded above, stand in 1892? Bryan's vote is 1,3 of whom S89 wete republicans in 18v2. “De-~ duct that and add the 519 democratic changes to McKinley, ani Bryan’s above vote represents 1,482 ‘of the democrats of 1892. Applying the same rule, and McKin- ley’s 4,912 votes repw>sent 4,782 of the re- publicans of the former year. In other words, the democratic vote of 182 has shrunk 130 and the republican increased 150, just the result reached under the former treatment of the Record’s tables, We find that the Record vote of 6,264 for Bryan and McKinley shows that in 1892 1,482 of them ofr were democrats and 4,782 republicans. those 4,752 republicans Bryan gained or 8 per cent, and of the 1,482 democrav McKinley gained 519, or per cent. Tak- ing the vote of the state in 1892—republi- can, 122,823—and Bryan will gain froin them 9,825 vot and McKinl ill gain from the 130,2%3 democratic 4 votes, and the table will stand thus: Democratic . Gain from republican: Lost from democrats. Deduct vote for Palmer..... Democratic vote in 1896. Republican Gain from democrats. Lost from republicans...... Republican vote of 1896 A majority of.... The Record poll took in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Da_ kota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Missouri and Kentucky. If the latter analysis of that poll be the correct one, the republicans will safely carry all these states except Kentucky, Missouri and Kansas. If the former be the correct analysis, they will lose Kentucky, Missouri, Kansas, Ne- ——— < = oo braska and Indiana.” carrying Minnesota and North- Dakota, if at all, by very mee- ger majorit The different reached by two modes of interpretation so much by the states spective parties, as by th: ties. If the former be thi contest will be very close; there is pending a re Both modes seem corre: divergent results show that other of them must be errone not Mo of —_ sty of Grentness. Evening Star: The To the Edite On the h of April, 1789, G. ington took the h of office and > preserve, protect and defen] the Cons tion of the United States. He was seven years of age and e zenith of his powers; during the Revol been called upon to ©: he hi the hibit to and the capacity in ac which the « gress sometimes lacked; he was not familiar with the du of a statesm and he knew that he had the love fidence Cf a united people to support him in his new field of usefuine easily the first man in the | shown the capaci y to lead and the 4 had shown their willingness it was with feelings of trepid entered upon the duties © follow. ¥ nor did he relish th were thrust upon hi his own intentions, his shoulders were bros enovgh to bear the by: upon them. In his said: “The magnitud trust could not but overwhe spondence one who, inheri dowments from nature, and u the duties of civil administratic »€ particularly of ht ticiencies. All I aver is th been my faithful to collect from a just appr own ation of ever Stance by which it might be affected.” In contrast with the modes: ditfidence of the first President is the assurance of a young man, now much in the public view, but litle more than half the of Wash: ington when he feared that ext ‘ and ability were insufficient, who was but a child when many of the statesmen of today were in the maturity of their powers, whose qualities as a leader have never been put to the test, yet who confidently offers to ta upon his yo 1 sho a burden every whit as heavy as that which Washington would fain have turned aside. Panoplied with th: that he has irherited no sclousnes “inferior end “= ments from nature” he bid. the pe come to him to be led into the chosen 1 Offering in the stroke of his pen a panacea for all the nat ills he does not for a moment the po mi To be young is not a but is a certain modesty very om youth, and there are those who wou more respect for his ability had he hi not quite so much. There are other and no less striking a ferences between Washington young man. Wh who was quite a Tom Watson, dr n Alexander able a ffer or woup a plan for the tlement of the public ) gave it his most hearty appro: it provided for the payment of the debt in full, and the assumption debts contracted by the eral states in thé proseeution’ of the War for Inde- pendenee.-He was eharged with pl into the hands of the m brokers, Wall street of the day; : itw utionaliza- tion, it was centralization o er, it Was all that the new school objects to most. Yet it is doubtful if any would wi w that things had bcen done rently ington believed firmly that if the g ernment was to endure it must be stro and it was his desire always that no o: should have more respect for its than its own citizens, It was und a part of Hamilton's plan that the government should make an exhibiti its own authority when Cong ed an act providing for revenue by tax on the manufacture of spirituous liquors. This was looked upon as a of state’s rights and by many people was re- garded as an ‘imposition. Yet when the people of Pennsylvania rose up to protest and their protest thre dimensions of a riot hesitate a moment the ansume did armed in si an force, drawn from the mi e sev- eral states, to quell the dis' The difference between his act and the act of F dent Cleveland in seading troops t Chicago was as the differen tweedledum and tweediedee. n, no man has ever had more res: for the importance and the dignity of ¢ upreme Court than he. One of his first acts after his uguration was to lovk about him for the men most Ae of filling that high office. He re every thought- ful man must, that in a law-pbiding land there must be a supreme tribunal of jus- tice. nd so the differences might be multi- i without number. Yet the name of hington is revered the world over. If of this young leader who has come out of the west, borne ulong to fame on a sca of. word are, then Washingt be ail he t m erred n ks they the world has been mistaken ment. No man of his time h: conception of the part to b: rew-born in the family of tions than Washington; but he ed his own ability in the matiers of government. hingion, on the thre new office, hesitated, doulte : ger man striving for the ice doubts not and knows wople of this countr on erred only in underes ing his « ies. In their sober, later thought will be contid: K. their judgme: the rashly nt youth from Nebraska? ——— _ wee A Matter of Memory. From Truth. There are many things in a "s life that he will never {crget, but they sre rot the things his wife teld him to: 3 AN ELOQUENT FIGURE OF From Purch. SPEECH. First conductor—“Well, Chawly, "ow did the beano gow orf lars night?” Second conductor—“Ow, the guv’nor done us a treat, Jimes.” conductor—“Lots o’ beer, eh?” conductor—“Beer? Now fear! Shempyne, cocky! shempyne tar wash @ ‘bus fa!” W'y, there was enough